To the Editors of Hindu – a letter RE MF Hussain

This is a very thought provoking letter that arrived in a forward-mail in my inbox.  I find it presents an extremely interesting point of view and deserves to be shared on the web with others who may not receive this email in their inbox:

This is a Letter  to the Editor of The Hindu, from a practising Christian lady who was Professor in Stella Maris College, Chennai till recently; now settled at Baroda, regarding an Edit in The Hindu in favour of bringing back MF Hussain to India.


Dear Ram,

I have taken time to write this to you Ram-for the simple reason that we have known you for so many years- you and The Hindu bring back happy memories Please take what I am putting down as those that come from an agonized soul. You know that I do not mince words and what I have to say I will-I call a spade a spade-now it is too late for me to learn the tricks of being called a ‘secularist’ if that means a bias for, one, and a bias against, another.

Hussain is now a citizen of Qatar-this has generated enough of heat and less of light. Qatar you know better than me is not a country which respects democracy or freedom of expression. Hussain says he has complete freedom-I challenge him to paint a picture of Mohammed fully clad.

There is no second opinion that artists have the Right of Freedom of expression. Is such a right restricted only to Hussain? Will that right not flow to Dan Brown-why was his film-Da Vinci Code not screened? Why was Satanic Verses banned-does Salman Rushdie not have that freedom of expression? Similarly why is Taslima hunted and hounded and why fatwas have been issued on both these writers? Why has Qatar not offered citizenship to Taslima? In the present rioting in Shimoga in Karnataka against the article Taslima wrote against the tradition of burqua which appeared in the Out Look in Jan 2007.No body protested then either in Delhi or in any other part of the country; now when it reappears in a Karnataka paper there is rioting. Is there a political agenda to create a problem in Karnataka by the intolerant goons? Why has the media not condemned this insensitivity and intolerance of the Muslims against Taslima’s views? When it comes to the Sangh Parivar it is quick to call them goons and intolerant etc. Now who are the goons and where is this tolerance and sensitivity?

Regarding Hussain’s artistic freedom it seems to run unfettered in an expression of sexual perversion only when he envisages the Hindu Gods and Goddesses. There is no quarrel had he painted a nude woman sitting on the tail of a monkey. The point is he captioned it as Sita. Nobody would have protested against the sexual perversion and his orientatation to sexual signs and symbols. But would he dare to caption it as ‘Fatima enjoying in Jannat with animals’?

Next example-is the painting of Saraswati copulating with a lion. Here again his perversion is evident and so is his intent. Even that lets concede cannot be faulted-each one’s sexual orientation is each one’s business I suppose. But he captioned it as Saraswati. This is the problem. It is Hussain’s business to enjoy in painting his sexual perversion. But why use Saraswati and Sita for his perverted expressions? Use Fatima and watch the consequence. Let the media people come to his rescue then. Now that he is in a country that gives him complete freedom let him go ahead and paint Fatima copulating with a lion or any other animal of his choice. And then turn around and prove to India-the Freedom of expression he enjoys in Qatar.

Talking about Freedom of Expression-this is the Hussain who supported Emergency-painted Indira Gandhi as Durga slaying Jayaprakas Narayan. He supported the jailing of artists and writers. Where did this Freedom of Expression go? And you call him secularist? Would you support the jailing of artists and writers Ram –would you support the abeyance of the Constitution and all that we held sacred in democracy and the excessiveness of Indira Gandhi to gag the media-writers- political opponents? Tell me honesty why does Hussain expect this Freedom when he himself did not support others with the same freedom he wants? And the media has rushed to his rescue. Had it been a Ram who painted such obnoxious, .degrading painting-the reactions of the media and the elite ‘secularists’ would have been different; because there is a different perception/and index of secularism when it comes to Ram-and a different perception/and index  of secularism when it comes to Rahim/Hussain.

It brings back to my mind an episode that happened to The Hindu some years ago.[1991]. You had a separate weekly page for children with cartoons, quizzes, and with poems and articles of school children. In one such weekly page The Hindu printed a venerable bearded man-fully robed with head dress, mouthing some passages of the Koran-trying to teach children .It was done not only in good faith but as a part of inculcating values to children from the Koran. All hell broke loose. Your office witnessed goons who rushed in-demanded an apology-held out threats. In Ambur,Vaniambadi and Vellore the papers stands were burned-the copies of The Hindu were consigned to the fire. A threat to raise the issue in Parliament through a Private Members Bill was held out-Hectic activities went on-I am not sure of the nature and the machinations behind the scene. But The Hindu next day brought out a public apology in its front page. Where were you Ram? How secular and tolerant were the Muslims?

Well this is of the past-today it is worse because the communal temperature in this country is at a all high-even a small friction can ignite and demolition the country’s peace and harmony. It is against this background that one should view Hussain who is bent on abusing and insulting the Hindu Gods and Goddesses. Respect for religious sentiments, need to maintain peace and harmony should also be part of the agenda of an artist-if he is great. If it is absent then he cannot say that he respects India and express his longing for India.

Let’s face it-he is a fugitive of law. Age and religion are immaterial. What does the media want-that he be absolved by the courts? Even for that he has to appear in the courts-he cannot run away-After all this is the country where he lived and gave expression to his pervert sadist, erotic artistic mind under Freedom of Expression. I simply cannot jump into the bandwagon of the elite ‘secularist’ and uphold what he had done. With his brush he had committed jihad-bloodletting.

The issue is just not nudity-Yes the temples-the frescos in Konarak and Kajhuraho have nude figures-But does it say that they are Sita, Sarswati or any goddesses? We have the Yoni and the Phallus as sacred signs of Life-of Siva and Shakthi-take these icons to the streets, paint them -give it a caption it become vulgar. Times have changed. Even granted that our ancients sculptured and painted naked forms and figures, with a pervert mind to demean religion is no license to repeat that in today’s changed political and social scenario and is not a sign of secularism and tolerance. I repeat there is no quarrel with nudity-painters have time and again found in it the perfection of God’s hand craft.

Let me wish Hussain peace in Qatar-the totalitarian regime with zero tolerance May be he will convince the regime there to permit freedom of expression in word, writing and painting. For this he could start experimenting painting forms and figure of Mohamed the Prophet-and his family And may I fervently wish that the media-especially The Hindu does not discriminate goons-let it not substitute tolerance for intolerance when it comes to  Rahim and Antony and another index for Ram.

I hope you will read this in the same spirit that I have written. All the best to you Ram.

Dr Mrs Hilda Raja, Vadodara  (her blog is at where other such thought provoking letters are available).

Here’s a link to show some of the paintings by MF Hussain, you be the judge, tell us what you think when it comes to his paintings whether he is simply using freedom of expression or whether he has any other agenda.

Iran and Ahmadinejad

Read an interesting editorial in the October 1st issue of The Gazette, Montreal about Ahmadinejad and Iran. The article written by a professor of International law at Mcgill University, Montreal definitely craves attention from all those who are offended by Ahmadinejad’s recent appearance in US. While I invite those interested in world politics to read this article, I did want to voice a few of my own thoughts and pointless ponderings on the topic.
I have been listening to the radio, especially as I’m driving, I love to listen to 940 News and it is really interesting to hear all the diverse opinions that people in my city have to offer about this issue of Ahmadinejad. The consensus seems to be that the Iranian prime-minister is pure-evil, and his outrageous comments about Israel, Holocaust and nuclear capabilities of Iran are all at fault. However, one should let him talk because of “Freedom of speech” and welcome him to the US as a speaker, if not for nothing, just to ask him questions about his evil comments and policies.
The article by Payam Akhavan puts in perspective all of Ahmadinejad’s comments confirming that Iran’s real power is with the “Council of Guardians” that are behind Ahmadinejad. So why is western powers and media misguiding their anger towards Ahmadeinjad? Shouldn’t we be talking about Khamenei and his hardline stance about all these? If Ahmadinejad is not the real power in the country, then obviously the real power is the one that is letting him say all these offending things. I wonder though about the fact that our media seems to be very ignorant about the inner politics of Iran, and therefore, is it really right for us to comment on these things when we know nothing about them? I never see any mention of other political powers in Iran, at least not in the mainstream media and it seems that people equate the voice of Ahmadinejad to the voice of Iran! I doubt that a leader of a country, be it any country, whether democratically elected or not, speaks for the whole populace. He may represent a section, perhaps even a majority (though according to Professor Akhavan, the desires of people of Iran are far from what Ahmadinejad talks about), but he can not represent the whole country. What’s unfortunate is that when super-powers in the world start noticing these things, start getting offended about these things and want to take action against such leaders, the whole country suffers.
When Ahmadinejad came to power, I remember reading in the newspaper about how a lot of Iranians were not happy, if the voting was “democratically” held, he should not have been elected. There must be something deeper that Ahmadinejad stirs in the people of Iran that had him elected as the prime-minister. Professor Akhavan is perhaps ignoring that in his editorial though he did mention that Ahmadinejad is relying on the nationalism in Iranian people. In either case, Ahmadinejad is there, he is staying, perhaps a better understanding of Iran’s inner politics can show us how to handle such political personalities.